• No results found

The Saudi-Iranian media war : a quantitative content analysis of Saudi Arabian and Iranian daily newspapers

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "The Saudi-Iranian media war : a quantitative content analysis of Saudi Arabian and Iranian daily newspapers"

Copied!
177
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

A Quantitative Content Analysis of

Saudi Arabian & Iranian Daily Newspapers

Hossein al Mahmoedi, BSc.

Student Number: 10004240

Hos87@msn.com

Supervisor: dr. S. (Said) Rezaeiejan

Second reader: dr. M. (Marcus) Michaelsen

Master Thesis

International Relations & Political Sciences

Graduate School of Social Sciences 2016

(2)

[2]

Abstract

After 9/11 and the following two wars on Iraq and Afghanistan the political environment in the Middle East shifted significantly and with the popular uprisings of 2010 the status-quo changed overwhelmingly into regional struggle of powerhouses such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. While these two countries are continuing their policies for their own aspirations for hegemony, in response to popular revolts in the region they are containing their attempts to safeguard their domestic sphere. Therefore, apart from the diplomatic rhetoric, it is also important to examine the domestic sphere and how, for instance, the media present the ‘other’ and themselves in the context of these conflicts. To examine this, I have used quantitative content analysis to analyze six newspapers in both Iran and Saudi Arabia, by applying imaging theory, stereotyping theory, imagology and social representation theory. The purpose of this research is to grasp the ‘social representation’ of the ‘other’ in the newspapers.

Keywords: Iran, Saudi Arabia, conflict, Middle East, sectarianism, social representation theory, imaging, imagology

(3)

[3]

Table of contents

1. Introduction 6 2. Theoretical framework 7 2.1 Imaging 8 2.1.1. Stereotyping 9 2.1.2. Imagology 11

2.1.3. Social Representation Theory 13

2.2. The Media 15

2.2.1. News value 15

2.2.2. Agenda-Setting 18

3. Methodology 20

3.1. Quantitative content analysis 20

3.2. Newspapers 22

3.2.1. Saudi Arabian newspapers 22

3.2.2. Iranian newspapers 23

3.3. Method and period of selection 24

3.4. Codebook and analyzing 25

4. Saudi-Iranian relations 27

4.1. Before Iranian Revolution of 1979 27

4.2. From 1979 till the end of Iran-Iraq war 28

4.3. Rapprochement of 1990s 29

4.4. US invasion of Iraq 30

4.5. Arab popular uprising 31

5. Common concepts 34 6. Results 37 6.1. Visibility 37 6.1.1. Article length 37 6.1.2. Title 39 6.1.3. Section 40 6.1.4. Form 42 6.1.5. Author 44 6.2. Theme 49 6.2.1. Subject 49 6.2.1.1. Primary subject 50 6.2.1.2. Secondary subject 52 6.2.2. Countries 54 6.2.2.1. Primary country 55 6.2.2.2. Secondary country 57 6.3. Sources 59 6.3.1. Primary source 59 6.3.2. Secondary sources 62 6.4. Image 65

6.4.1. Image of the countries 65

6.4.1.1. Primary image Iran 66

6.4.1.2. Secondary image Iran 67

6.4.1.3. Primary image Saudi Arabia 69 6.4.1.4. Secondary image Saudi Arabia 71

(4)

[4]

6.4.2.1. Primary image gap government-people Iran 74 6.4.2.2. Secondary image gap government-people Iran 75 6.4.2.3. Primary image gap government-people Saudi Arabia 76 6.4.2.4. Secondary image gap government-people Saudi Arabia 78

6.4.3. Image terrorism 79

6.4.3.1 Primary image Iran & terrorism 80 6.4.3.2. Secondary image Iran & terrorism 81 6.4.3.3. Primary image Saudi Arabia & terrorism 83 6.4.3.4. Secondary image Saudi Arabia & terrorism 84

6.4.4. Modernity 85 6.4.5. Women 87 6.5. Religion 87 6.5.1. Shiism 88 6.5.2. Sunnism 90 6.5.3. Wahhabism 91 6.6. Events 94 6.6.1. Image ODS/ORH 94

6.6.2. Image Iran Nuclear Deal 95

6.7. Relations 97

6.7.1. Image of the West 97

6.7.1.1. Image Iran-West relation 97 6.7.1.2. Image Saudi Arabia-West relation 99

6.7.2. Image of Israel 99

6.7.2.1. Image Iran-Israel relation 100 6.7.2.2. Image Saudi Arabia-Israel relation 101

6.8. Image involvement in conflicts 103

6.8.1. Syrian civil war 103

6.8.1.1. Image Iran’s involvement in Syria 103 6.8.1.2. Image Saudi Arabia’s involvement in Syria 105

6.8.2. Iraqi conflict 107

6.8.2.1. Image Iran’s involvement in Iraq 107 6.8.2.2. Image Saudi Arabia’s involvement in Iraq 109

6.8.3. Yemeni conflict 110

6.8.3.1. Iran’s involvement in Yemen 110 6.8.3.2. Saudi Arabia’s involvement in Yemen 113

6.8.4. Lebanese conflict 115

6.8.5. Bahrain conflict 116

6.9. Criticizing 118

6.9.1. Criticizing Iran 118

6.9.2. Criticizing Saudi Arabia 121

7. Conclusion 124

8. Literature & References 127

9. Websites 131

10. Book of codes 132

(5)

[5]

“Iran intervenes in Arab affairs, Israel does not […] history shows that Israel

does not militarily intervene in Arab countries, but Iran does […] Iran [also]

occupies Arab soil, so why Iran should be better than Israel […] the fact is that

Iran occupies a position that comes before Israel as an enemy”

(Turki Al Sudairi, Al Riyadh newspaper: October 13, 2011)

“If Al Saud is not more criminal than the Zionists, without a doubt, they are no

different from them. Therefore, it is the duty of Muslims to oppose the princes,

statesmen and military bases of Saudi Arabia, similar to the revolutionary

Palestinians’ opposition against the Zionist occupation”

(6)

[6]

1. Introduction

Prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Middle-East, in a way, was in a certain status-quo that, relatively, could be considered as stable. After the 9/11 attacks and the following two wars on Iraq and Afghanistan the political environment shifted significantly. With the popular uprisings, which began in 2010, the status-quo changed overwhelmingly into regional struggle of powerhouses such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. While these two countries are containing their attempts to safeguard their domestic sphere, in response to popular revolts in the region and their own aspirations for Gulf hegemony, their political relationship have been deteriorating. Although the Saudi-Iranian relation was never considered to be excellent, nevertheless, it has also never been so turbulent and hostile. The two countries extremely differ in their political perspectives to deal with conflicts in the region and their views are opposed to each other in Syria, Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and the rest of the region.

The Mina stampede of 24 September 2015 wherein 465 Iranians lost their lives (Tasnim News Agency) and the execution of the Saudi Arabian Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr ( خيش رمنلا رقاب رمن) on 2 January 2016, followed by the reaction of Iranian protesters and the mob attack on Saudi Arabian embassy in Tehran, has altered this relationship significantly. These attitudes towards each other come from a complicated and turbulent past and it has not always been this tens. For example, prior to the Iranian revolution in 1979, Saudi Royal family considered the Shah of Iran as a close ally. The sectarian differences and Arab-Persian distinctions were not the priority of both monarchs (Jahner, 2012:27-28).

But since then the state of the Saudi-Iranian relation has changed significantly. So far, 2015 has been one of the worst years in the history of this relation and, due to events of this year, the regional political context has not been beneficial. The grievances has reached a level that can be described as hostile, as can be understood in this quote from Saudi Arabian Al Riyadh newspaper:

“There is no doubt that, since ancient time, Iran is used to cooperate with imperialists such as the Portuguese, French and British against Arabs and Muslims, and we all know that it has cooperated with the United States in Iraq, and today they are even like occupiers of Iraq, a situation that is not much different from Lebanon, Syria and part of Yemen. This is due to the help of traitors and proxy forces in those countries implementing their plans, especially targeting Sunni Arabs. This aggressive attitudes falls within the framework of a sectarian,

(7)

[7]

racist and expansionist conspiracy towards all Arabs without exception” (Hasna Al Quney’er, Al Riyadh Newspaper: 8 March 2015)

This hostility is mutual, as this next quote in the Iranian Keyhan newspaper shows:

“Saudi Arabia does not only export oil but also a very dangerous ideology. Saudi terror bred and fueled the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites. Ideologically, they have supported ISIS for a long time. For decades, this regime has spread and promoted radical ideas that have provided grounds for radicalization of young Muslims around the world. Now that the evil spirit is out of the lamp, even Saudi Arabia is unable to stop it” (Keyhan newspaper, 21 December 2015)

These types of terminology in both newspapers are not uncommon in 2015. The political leaders and their statements are partially responsible for this strained relation. Though the media in these two countries are not independent, they could also account as a separate actor influencing the public opinion. Their coverage of the events, selection of news, emphasizing the importance of some incidents, ignoring others, selection of words, the style of writing and the writers’ attitude towards the ‘other’ are all part of the impact that the media exert on the cognition, memories and opinion of the public. In this research I will examine the Saudi Arabian and Iranian daily newspapers by using quantitative content analysis to analyze what is the role of the Saudi Arabian and the Iranian daily newspapers in shaping the image of the ‘other’ and how they represent each other in their daily newspapers. What kind of terminology, concepts and descriptive images they mostly use to describe and shape the image of the ‘other’.

To answer the questions above, I will use imaging theory, imagology, stereotypes and social representation theory to shape a code book which contains 67 variables. Each variable has its own indicators, which are also extracted from the theoretical framework. I will use the IBM SPSS Data Editor to codify and analyze the content of 720 articles from six daily newspapers (three Saudi Arabian and three Iranian newspapers). In the methodology chapter I will provide a comprehensive description of the method, the selection criteria, the newspapers and the way of creating the book of codes. But first, I will give a historical overview of the Saudi-Iranian relation, followed by the theoretical framework. The results and conclusion are the last parts of this research.

(8)

[8]

2. Theoretical framework

This chapter is presented as the theoretical framework of this research. In the first part, a number of theories and approaches such as imaging, imagology and stereotypes are illustrated. Then, the social representation theory is introduced. Next, is the role of the media and its influence on the public opinion; to which extent can the journalists influence the public opinion and what is their role in the relation between the ‘sender’ and the ‘receiver’? By answering these questions, I try to have a more comprehensive understanding of the relation between readers and daily newspapers.

2.1 Imaging

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, imaging means:

“Visual representation of an object, such as a body part or celestial body, for the purpose of medical diagnosis or data collection, using any of a variety of techniques, such as ultrasonography or spectroscopy”

Although this would seem, in the first place, natural-scientific, it grasps some parts of the purpose of this research. It defines imaging as ‘visual representation’ for the purpose of ‘data collection’. According to this definition, imaging is visual representation which could include ingredients such as videos and pictures. The purpose of this technographic phenomenon is to be able to collect data. However, in social sciences imaging is considered to represent, consciously or unconsciously, existing data or to create new data to influence the receiver. Also, in social sciences, imaging is used as a theory of (social) representation. According to Serge Moscovici, Social Representation Theory (SRT) – which will be presented later – is the gradually emergence of collective shared patterns of practices, values and beliefs resulted from daily interpersonal interactions and communicative dynamics (Mosche, 2012: 597). SRT connects individual apprehensions to their cultural and group identities.

This perspective of imaging is a psychological approach which also can be found in the definition of imaging in the book ‘Effectief Beeldvormen’ (Dutch for ‘effective imaging’) of Smelik, Buikema and Meijer in which they define imaging as: “Gradually formed idea about something” (2007:5-6) which is also a description from the Van Dale Dutch dictionary. From

(9)

[9]

the words ‘gradually’ and ‘idea’ they come to two conclusions: 1) Imaging is a ‘process’; it is something that is created, and 2) It is a ‘mental’ process; idea is something that represents the mind. This perspective does not suffice the actual process of forming an image in the mind. According to Smelik et al, a mental process such as imaging is not easy to be analyzed and this makes imaging comparably an even more complex phenomenon. According to Smelik et al, this mental part contains three levels: 1) materiality: the concrete images and texts; 2) The impact: creation of mental images possibly resulting in a certain behavior; and, 3) the influence: the possible long term change in mental imaging (Smelik et al, 2007: 6).

There has been much attention about the psychological side of the imaging and little about the material side: this is the concrete images and texts that establish certain perceptions of viewers and readers (Smelik et al, 2007: 5-6). So, the intention of this research is not the actual process in the mind of human being, but rather the attention is focused on the materiality part which contains the concrete images and texts. From this perspective, I exclude the psychological part (impact and influence) and hope to illuminate the social part (the materiality) of this process.

2.1.1. Stereotyping

By selective attention to certain words and the use of repetition and selective omission of certain information, the media are creating stereotypes that become part of our long-term memory (Lester, 1997). Walter Lippmann was one of the first to wright about this concept, due to which stereotyping became a dominant approach in psychology in the twenties of the last decennium (Banaji, 2001). In his book Public Opinion, Lippmann indicates that individuals have prejudices about people, events, things and situations. This is because we do not usually directly perceive or observe any phenomenon or actuality, but we are informed about these by some intermediary medium:

“[…] we can see how indirectly we know the environment in which nevertheless we live. We can see that the news of it comes to us now fast, now slowly; but that whatever we believe to be a true picture, we treat as if it were environment itself” (Lippmann, 2010:9)

There is a difference between the real object and what we hear, read or see. The use of stereotypes, according to Lippmann, is one way to categorize rather than remembering all the

(10)

[10]

details. Also, in Social and Psychology of Stereotypes, Banaji claims that research shows that the so-called within-group differences are minimized and between-group differences are exaggerated. He claims stereotypes can be generated by a misunderstanding of the frequency with which an attribute is associated with a group. For instance, perceivers may come to see an imaginary correlation based on the shared distinctiveness of particular attributes. To be more specific, when specific social performances of a group other than the main group occur, such an event is overemphasized in memory and produces a bias in perception such that their occurrence is overestimated (Banaji, 2001:15102). According to Lippmann, a pattern of this phenomenon can also be found in our moral codes in different areas. This stereotyping in moral codes largely determines what facts we would observe. Moral codes are coming from the environment that define that person, and which can also be extracted from culture:

“For the most part we do not first see, and then define; we define first and then see. In the great blooming, buzzing confusion of the outer world we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for us by our culture” (Lippmann, 2010:59)

According to McGarty, Yzerbyt and Spears, stereotypes are observations of groups within a society in which individuals exist with the same values, standards, characteristics, or who are in the same circumstances. Without them there is no society and without groups there is no order and structure in society:

“Without individuals there could be no society, but unless individuals also perceive themselves to belong to groups, that is, to share characteristics, circumstances, values and beliefs with other people, then society would be without structure or order. These perceptions of groups are called stereotypes” (McGarty, Yzerbyt and Spears, 2002:1)

The observation of these structures is therefore important to understand the world around us, and that is why stereotypes are important. Stereotypes, according to McGarty et al, are used for three reasons: They are used as a tool to explain things; or as devices that save energy (to categorize easier); or a shared faith of groups (2002: 2). In their book Effectief Beeldvormen Smelik, Buikema and Meijer explain that stereotyping is to pour a mental image in a particular solid form. Moreover, the stereotype is the result of generalizations. Thus, a stereotype shapes an idea or an image that is fixed and unchanging. Therefore, a mental image becomes an unshakable idea (Smelik et al, 1999:24-25). It is important to understand that stereotypes are about ‘the picture in our head’ that has been molded in a solid and rather

(11)

[11]

unchangeable form and these forms are not about individuals separately, but rather attributes and characteristics which are ascribed to groups (Smelik et al, 1999:27):

“A stereotype is a specific sign. It is a sign with a fixed and unchanging meaning. In this case we speak of rigid imaging. (This is) for stereotyping people. That means that fixed and unchanging meanings will be attached to a nation, folk or a group of individuals” (Smelik et al, 1999:27)

But the meaning that is given to a specific image is not the same for everyone. It depends, among other things, on the cultural context. Meanings are not always created consciously or with a preconceived purpose, but can also be the result of unconscious and not-meant consequence of contextual factors (Smelik et al, 1999:38-39). With this factor in mind, the stereotypes form a significant part of the imaging and consequently this research.

2.1.2. Imagology

There is a branch in social sciences that is trying to understand the images of cultures and countries which is called imagology. This discipline analyses the national stereotypes based on mental and textual representation of the ‘other’ and ‘us’. The purpose of imagology research is not only to develop a theory with respect to cultural and national identities, but also aims to develop a theory that includes the stereotypes and images that has been associated with these cultures and nations (Beller & Leersen, 2007: xiii-xvi). In contrast to other more empirical forms of research that try to define folks, cultures and countries, the imagology research focuses on the textual representation of them. The fact that these representations have a subjective character forms the central line of reference of imagology (Beller & Leersen, 2007: xiii-xvi). According to Joep Leersen:

“The nationality represented (the spected) is silhouetted in the perspectival context of the representing text or discourse (the spectant). For that reason, imagologists will have particular interest in the dynamics between those images which characterize the Other (hetero-images) and those which characterize one’s own, domestic identity (self-images or auto-images)” ( 2007:27)

Despite the fact that concepts such as culture, nationality and identity in the course of the years, have been approached in a constructivist and essentialist way, it has always been in

(12)

[12]

deterministic terms. The idea pe+rsisted that culture, nationality and identity are constructions that explain human actions and not vice versa (Bosma, 2012:13). But the exact idea of ‘construction’ can explain the vice versa, that is, individuals define these concepts and they can also change them. According to Manfred Beller, the philosophical reasoning about the concept ‘image’ starts with Plato and Aristotle and continues via neo Platonism, empiricism and idealism. But, Beller claims, that the most influential national characterizations, comes at the exact turning point from the humanist and Enlightenment idea of national characters, to politically inspired nationalism, as a result of the French Revolution and Napoleon’s wars of conquest. From this moment, the image of other nations and people has become an important argument, not only in political discussions between nations, but also in cultural representations of others (Beller & Leersen, 2007:3). The debate of image of the nation is at its peak when Ernest Renan presents “Qu'est-ce qu'une nation?” in 1882. Nowadays, social scientists assume that ‘national identities’ are intellectual projections, rather than an objective set of conditions which represents an actuality (Bock, 2000:11). So, they see the nation as an ‘imagined community’ which derives from images people create by the process of modification of social representations and presentation of new images. In philosophical theories of imagological representation, derived from Aristotelian pictorial theory, the image is described as ‘inner pictures which are in mind and in souls’ (Scholz, 2004:9-11). In cognitive sciences, they are described as ‘mental pictorial representation’ which are derived from interpretation rather than experience (Gottschling, 2003:143). But, literary analysis can be distinguished from the others, because it concentrates on verbally and textually codified images. In this research I use the term image as the mental representation of the ‘other’ who is represented by the characteristics of group, culture and nation. This kind of rationalization rules our opinion of others and controls our behavior towards them (Beller and Leersen, 2007:4). Another important perspective is derived from the process of perception which implies: “for the most part we do not first see, and then define, but we define and then see” (Lippmann, 2010:81). This not only implies that our way of judging and seeing is conditioned by preconceived images, stereotypes and prejudices, but also that a way of observing is also a way of not observing (Burke, 1935:70). So, paying attention to object X is neglecting of object Y and this selective perceptions results into tension between the ‘known’ and the actual ‘reality’. According to Michael Kunszik, different groups perceive things from their own distinctive, specific perspective – ‘selective perception’ – and consequently and depending on their judgement arrive to different point of view – ‘selective evaluation’. As a consequence, people have different images of countries, people, groups and cultures which are derived from

(13)

[13]

their own selective value judgements, because they have different selective observations (Kunszik, 1997:104).

In a context of a world with rising tensions between groups, cultures and countries, it seems that the gap between the ‘other’ and ‘us’ becomes larger. The within-group differences disappear and the between-group characteristics are overemphasized. The flashy concepts such as ‘clash of civilizations’, ‘axis of evil’ and the orientalist idea of the clash between Islam and the West, becomes the trend. In a troubled Middle East, one of the clashes that seems to be worsened is the, I assume geopolitical, proxy-war-like competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia to gain influence in a destabilized Middle East. This clash is also palpable in the daily newspapers of these two countries. Thus, imagology is a fitting tool to understand this relationship by focusing on the way they represent each other and the image that is associated with this representation.

2.1.3. Social Representation Theory

As in the previous section mentioned, SRT is the gradually emergence of collective shared patterns of practices, values and beliefs resulted from daily interpersonal interaction and communicative dynamics. This idea, first introduced by Serge Moscovici, has been used in variety of disciplines, but is quite unknown to the field of media research.

“Social representations […] concern the contents of everyday thinking and the stock of ideas that give coherence to our religious beliefs, political ideas and the connections we create as spontaneously as we breathe. They make it possible for us to classify persons and objects, to compare and explain behaviors and to objectify them as part of our social setting” (Moscovici, 1988: 214)

According to Birgitta Höijer the theory offers a new approach to study the media and the construction of societal and political issues for some specific time period (2011:3). Social representations are processes of collectively making of meanings which result in common cognitions. This, results in producing social bonds which unites societies, organizations and groups and sets spotlight on phenomena that become subject of debate, controversy, conflict, strong feelings, ideological clashes and changes the collective thinking in society. This theory is relevant to this research because it specifies a communicative mechanism explaining how

(14)

[14]

ideas are transformed into a perception of common sense. This mechanism touches the very core argument of mediated communication and how the media generates collective cognition (Höijer, 2011:3).

According to Höijer, the process of representation of societal and political issues by the media is based on two mechanisms of anchoring and objectification.

Anchoring means that new ideas or phenomenon turn into additional ingredients to make new social representations through repetition of communication. This is, according to Höijer, a kind of cultural assimilation within which new social representations are incorporated into well-known social representations and at the same time results into transformation or modification of the old social representation such that it becomes part of the collective frames of references of a society (Höijer, 2011:7). One way of anchoring is naming. By naming a new phenomenon we basically give it a well-known face and extricate it from an anonymity to give it a genealogy and to include it in a complex of specific words, to actually locate it in the identity matrix of our culture” (Moscovici, 2000:46). A second way is emotional anchoring which refers to a communicative process by which a new phenomenon is attached to well-known emotions. This process makes the unknown recognizable as a threat, a danger or something to worry about (Höijer, 2011:9). Anchoring has also other perspectives such as antinomies and metaphors which all basically influence the main anchoring mechanism in the same way.

On the other hand, objectification makes from something abstract a new actuality and specific tangible thing. By transforming it into something concrete we may perceive and experience with our senses, objectification makes the unknown known. It is the materialization of an abstract idea which occurs in the media by representing it as a concrete phenomenon existing in the physical world (Höijer, 2011: 12). According to Moscovici, objectification is much more active process than anchoring which, he argues, takes place almost automatically each time we are confronted with a new phenomenon. To turn an unfamiliar idea into a much more concrete reality takes more effort (Moscovici, 2000). Höijer presents two forms of objectification: emotional objectification and personification. We may talk about emotional objectification when there is a strong emotional component attached to a concept or new phenomenon with the use of, for instance, frightening images and videos involving human suffering. By objectification through personification, an idea, phenomenon or incident is linked to a specific person. In this research I will use these varieties of anchoring and

(15)

[15]

objectification concepts to understand the way the media can influence the inclusion and introduction of a new social representation into an already existing one.

2.2. The Media

The role of the media has always been important in shaping of the public opinion, particularly in democratic systems. However, also the non-democratic regimes are concerned about this and, therefore, the role of the media is very important in both systems of governing and their policies. The difference is that in an authoritarian regime the media are dependent on the limitations that the regime imposes and therefore their role of news presentation is slightly different. In this part of the research, two aspects of the media and public opinion relation will be presented: News value and agenda-setting.

2.2.1. News value

To understand the value of the news, it is important to be able to explain what is news? The word news can refer to what we see on the front pages of newspapers or the ingredients of daily journals. In fact, the news is what the editor decides and what he sees as important (Bosma, 2013:25). Also, the editor determines the order and the content of the news and that implies that some news has been labelled as more important than others. Apparently, some events or incidents have more value than others (Bosma, 2013:25). Scientists agree that there are characteristics that define the value of an event and, as a consequence, there are events that have more chance of being selected if they meet these characteristics (Teunissen, 2005: 11-12). In their research on visibility of international crisis in Norwegian newspapers (1965), Johan Galtung and Mari Ruge claim that events reach the status of news when they meet twelve criteria. They explain that these factors are not completely independent of each other, but they have some specific relations (Galtung & Ruge, 1965:64).

In their research they conclude that faraway and less powerful countries reach the Norwegian news, only if it’s about negative news or news about the elites. In contrast, in the news from the neighboring countries and powerful states, non-elite persons and positive news are included. Although, they do not claim the exhaustiveness of their list, their theory is also criticized.

(16)

[16] Frequency Threshold Unambiguity Meaningfulness Consonance Unexpectedness Continuity Composition

Reference to elite nations Reference to elite people Reference to persons

Reference to something negative

Chart 2.1: News value criteria of Galtung & Ruge (1965)

A point of debate is what criteria does or does not need to be on the list. Their research method, i.e. an analysis of the news on the basis of criteria or factors is still standing, but some researchers have proposed other new criteria. In their research What Is News? Galtung and Ruge Revisited (2001), Tony Harcup and Deirdre O’Neill took the work of Galtung and Ruge and examined it. By combining the results of their research in British newspapers with the work of Galtung and Ruge, they have come to a number of new values.

1. The power elite 2. Celebrity 3. Entertainment 4. Surprise 5. Bad news 6. Good news 7. Magnitude 8. Relevance 9. Follow-up 10. Newspaper agenda

Chart 2.2: News criteria of Harcup & O’Neill (2001)

Patrick Weber refers to Galtung and Ruge in his research No news from the East? and the coverage of Eastern Europe in German newspapers in 2010. His research shows that criteria such as affinity, closeness and status of any country, does not determine the extent of coverage. But if these three criteria are combined they have a predictable value. If a combination of these three criteria plays a role in the news about a country, that country is more frequently included in the news and with greater diversity of topics (Weber, 2010: 480).

(17)

[17]

Saudi Arabia and Iran meet the factor of closeness, but the other two factors fail to explain the great amount of news. In this case the affinity does not have to be positive affinity, but it can be a negative one. Weber claims that affinity can also be interpreted as explicit interest for subjects that refer to specific countries, which results to more frequently coverage of them. He calls this ‘issue-bound interest’ (Weber, 2010:479). Although he stressed that his model is in principle applicable only to Eastern Europe, he claims that since the theory he uses is not bound to an issue or region, its generalization-factor can be determined in future researches (Weber,2010:481).

Figure 2.1: Weberian model of factors that influence the news.

It is obvious that the kind of news that reaches the public depends on variety of factors. The criteria in each level of selection, even ‘scientifically’ based selection, can be labelled as subjective and consequently the news is some subjectively representation of reality and not reality itself. The proper work of a journalist to seek the truth does not guarantee the reflection of reality and is therefore scientifically indefensible (Teunissen, 2005:103). The journalist, not only, can make mistakes, but because of variety of reasons they are forced to make choices and selections. In 1950 David Manning White introduced the concept of ‘gatekeeper’ that refers to the fact that journalists are the ones deciding what news may reach the next stage of

News flow parameters

News geography Frequency of coverage of a Country Continuity of coverage of a Country Topical variability of coverage of a Country Variability in genres in coverage of a Country Issue-bound interest Status Affinity closeness Organizational determinants

(18)

[18]

the selection in the process of news production (Teunissen,2005:103). That is why it is important to pay attention to, for example, the sources that are used in a specific newspaper.

2.2.2. Agenda-Setting

The agenda-setting theory describes the influence of the media to determine the public agenda. That is the ability of the media to frequently cover a specific subject rather than the other and consequently determines which issue is more important to the audience. Agenda-setting theory was formally introduced by Max McCombs and Donald Shaw in their research of 1968 American presidential elections. They conclude that there is a strong correlation between the public opinion and which issues were labelled as important and the issues that the media frequently report on (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). With this result they expose the agenda-setting effect and claim that any attempt to dismiss this correlation by claiming that ‘they [public & media] both are simply responding to the same event and not influencing each other’, assumes that the public have alternative means to observe day-to-day change, which, they claim, is not the case in their research (McCombs & Shaw, 1972: 185). Also, they dismiss the critic that the media simply were successful in matching their message to the demand of the audience. They state that since a lot of studies indicate a sharp divergence between the news values of professional journalists and the audience, it would be remarkable to find a perfect match in this case (McCombs & Shaw, 1972: 185). Although these arguments may partially hold truth in their case, people nowadays are not completely dependent on the mass media for information. However, studies of important scientists such as Robert Albritton & Jarol Manheim (1984) and David Perry (1984) also indicate that, when it comes to news about countries, the public opinion still depends on mass media. They influence not only the proportion of news about countries, but they also influence the image and representations of these countries (Brewer, Graf & Willnot, 2003:493). Yet, another hypothesis that contradicts this theory is that the new mass variety of social media and alternative sources of information, and additionally, personal connections, creates personal independent ideas about countries. Still, this hypothesis assumes that the individual has the complete freedom of usage of social media. So, in this research, agenda-setting theory can still be an important tool to expose the themes that are important to Saudi Arabian and Iranian newspapers, since these two countries public domain are not labelled as completely free. The purpose of this research is not to expose agenda-setting in Saudi Arabian and Iranian

(19)

[19]

newspapers, but rather to use agenda-setting as a tool to explain relations between the media – in this case the daily newspapers – and the public opinion.

In this chapter I have presented, in two parts (Imaging and the media), the theoretical frame work of this research. Based on these theories I have selected six variables: Image, religion, relations, conflicts, events and critics. In addition to the theories, historical background of the Saudi-Iranian relations and the methodology, which will be presented in the next two chapters, are of utmost importance. Based on these three chapters the six variables have been operationalized in the way that in figure 2.2 is illustrated. In the next part the methodology, which is quantitative content analysis, will be presented and the variables will be explained in more details.

Figure 2.2: Operationalization of theoretical framework and historical background. Theory Image 1.Country 2.Government 3.Terrorism 4.Modernity 5.Women Religon 1.Shiism 2.Sunnism 3.Wahhabism Relations 1.West 2.Israel Conflicts 1.Syria 2.Iraq 3.Yemen 4.Bahrain 5.Lebanon Events 1.ODS/ORH 2. Iran Nuclear Deal

Critics 1.Criticism of Iran 2.Criticism of Saudi

Arabia History

(20)

[20]

3. Methodology

In this chapter I present the empirical framework of this research. First, I will explain the methodology of this research, which is the quantitative content analysis. Then, the selection of the Iranian and Saudi Arabian newspapers, the selection criteria of the articles, and the period of this research are presented. One of the key parts of this methodology is the book of codes which will be explained in the last part.

3.1. Quantitative content analysis

According to Devi B. Prasad, content analysis is the scientific study of content of communication with reference to the meanings, contexts and intentions contained in messages (Prasad, 2008:1). Bernard Berelson describes it as a systematic, objective and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication (1952). Ole Rudolf Holsti characterizes content analysis as a technique to make inferences by systematically identifying specific characteristics of content (1969). Also Fred Kerlinger defines content analysis as a methodology to study and analyze communication in a systematic, objective and quantitative manner to measure variables (1973).

To answer the main question of this research I decided to use quantitative content analysis. Judging from the relevant literature and the earlier studies of this kind, this method seemed most suitable. The advantage of this method is that it allows for a broader research, which includes a greater number of subjects and it makes it easier to generalize. Also it can allow for greater objectivity and in general it provides advantages in descriptive presentation of certain phenomena. It also provides more validity and reliability and it can easily be redone (O’Neil, 2006). Daniel Kruger confirms that the quantitative content analysis is best suited to summarize variety of sources of information and provides tools for comparison between the categories of more cases over time (Kruger, 2003). But one of the most important characteristics of this method is the systematic and objective nature of it (Holsti, 1969). Therefore, this definition of quantitative content analysis is selected:

“Quantitative content analysis is the systematic and replicable examination of symbols of communication, which have been assigned numeric values according to valid measurement rules and the analysis of relationships involving those values using statistical methods, to

(21)

[21]

describe the communication, draw inferences about its meaning, or infer from the communication to its context, both of production and consumption” (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:25)

Systematic

According to Riffe et al. the systematic character of the research has two sides: theoretic and practical. From a theoretic point of view, systematic research requires identification of key concepts involved in a subject, specification of possible relationships among them, and generation of testable hypotheses (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:25). However, systematic character can also be identified because of the practical matters such as short time frame of research, predetermined variables and precise measurements, all of which lay the ground rules in advance for what qualifies as evidence of sufficient quality (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:25-26).

Replicable

The concept replicable in the definition of quantitative content analysis, usually, refers to issues of reliability, objectivity, and clarity in description of research procedures (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:26). It also depends, partially, on operationalization of the variables, which is the process of defining concepts in terms of the actual, measured variables. In other words, if any other researcher applies this methodology with the same system of inquiry, the same research design, and the same way of operationalization of the concepts, should find the same results (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:26-28).

Symbols of communication

According to Riffe et al. the symbols of communication are also variables (2008:28), which means that the symbols used for communication are exposed to selection criteria. All communication-forms use verbal or textual symbols, which can vary from person to person and culture to culture, but also the conditions under which these symbols are used or produced can also be listed as variables; that is, they can be natural or manipulated (Riffe, Lacy & Fico, 2008:26-28).

Now that I clarified the definition of quantitative content analysis, I will also refer to some negative aspects of this methodology. The problem with this method is that the data collected are much narrower and sometimes even superficial. Also, the results are limited to numerical

(22)

[22]

descriptions and human perceptions are relatively less elaborative and it does not provide a detailed narrative. That is why I decided to use additional qualitative content analysis to support the numerical and graphical findings by examining a small selection of texts from the newspapers. Still, the main method is quantitative content analysis and the additional usage of qualitative content has only a supportive role.

3.2. Newspapers

Initially, I intended to choose four newspapers per country to have a broader spectrum of political representation in these two major countries of the Middle-East. But because of the difficulties of availability of news archives and the limitation of time, I chose to have a selection based on political trilogy of conservative, moderate and liberal. Consequently, I decided to select three newspapers per country.

Conservative Moderate Liberal Iran Keyhan (ناهيک) 360,000 Ettelaat (تاعلاطا) 90,000 Shargh (قرش) 130,000-360,000 Saudi Arabia Al Jazirah (ةريزجلا)

125,000

Al Riyadh (ضايرلا) 150,000

Al Yaum (مويلا) 135,000

Chart 3.1: Newspapers and their circulation in Iran and Saudi Arabia.

3.2.1. Saudi Arabian newspapers

In Saudi Arabian context, there are four major influential newspapers: Al Jazirah (ةريزجلا), Al Riyadh (ضايرلا), Al Watan (نطولا) and Al Madina (ةنيدملا). Estimations of Saudi Research & Marketing Group in 2009 show that Al Riyadh has an estimated circulation of 150.000. This daily newspaper is based in Riyadh and is published by Al Yamamah Press Establishment (ةيفحصلا ةماميلا ةسسؤم) and its chief editor is Turki Al Sudairi (يريدسلا يكرت) who is also the chairman of Saudi Journalist Association (website Al Riyadh). He is considered to be the most influential newspaper editor and is also regarded to be pro-government. This is why some consider the newspaper to be conservative, although the newspaper is privately owned. One of the reasons I label this newspaper as moderate is because next to its conservative character of being pro-government (same as other newspapers), it has also considerable amount of relatively liberal views and is influential under the highly educated, well established readers. In contrast, Al Jazirah is much more conservative. It has an estimated

(23)

[23]

circulation of 125.000 and it is considered as a pro-government, pro-Islamist newspaper (Saudi Research & Marketing Group, 2009). Although its circulation is less than the other major newspapers, it has great influence among the Islamist. It is published by Al Jazirah Corporation for Press, Printing and Publishing (رشنلاو ةعابطلل ةفاحصلل ةريزجلا ةسسؤم) and its chief editor is Khalid bin Hamad Al Malik (كلاملا دمح نب دلاخ). Although its headquarter is in Riyadh, it is widely distributed in the whole country and other Arab and European countries. One of the unique characteristics of Al Jazirah is their wide opinion section which is a platform for various columnists who share their opinion mostly on Royal family, Arab and international issues. For the third newspaper, I, initially, selected the Al Watan daily newspaper, but due to the difficulties of the search engine on the official website, there were not enough articles associated with Iran to be found. Consequently, the next newspaper which partially meets the characteristics of a liberal view is the Al Yaum newspaper. Although, Al Yaum is also considered to be pro-government and it does not have the same pro-reform ambitions as Al Watan, it has a long history of being prosecuted by the government due to the critical content of its opinion section. Al Yaum is a Dammam based daily newspaper with an estimated circulation of 135.000 and it is not only published in Dammam but also in other Golf states close to Eastern part of Saudi Arabia. It is published by Dar Al Yaum for Press, Printing and Publishing (رشنلاو ةعابطلاو ةفاحصلل مويلا راد) and its chief editor is Abdul Wahhab Al Faiz (زيافلا باهولادبع) (World Press Trends, 2008:747). Its former chief editor was Hamid Ghuyarfi who was dismissed of his position due to criticism of Saudi ruling family. One other reason to select this newspaper is that it is the major newspaper in Al Sharqiyyah (Eastern) province with population of 4.1 million of which two-thirds are Shiites. The three Saudi Arabian newspapers used in this research, are published in Arabic language.

3.2.2. Iranian newspapers

For the Iranian newspaper the selection criteria is the same. The most influential and most conservative daily newspaper in Iran is Keyhan. Its international version is published in London and it has an estimated circulation of 350.000 – though the Farsi circulation is around 100.000 – and it is considered to be pro-constitution, principalist and conservative (Greenberg, 2008). Its chief editor is Hossein Shariatmadari (یرادمتعيرش نيسح) who is a conservative journalist and has been described as a supporter of former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a close confident of the supreme leader. He is also a member of the Association of Muslim Journalists (ناملسم ناراگن همانزور نمجنا). Keyhan is known for its

(24)

[24]

conservative perspective on domestic matters and hard line attitude towards the state of Israel and US government. It has also been described as close to Revolutionary Guards. The second newspaper is Ettelaat (تاعلاطا), which is considered as a moderate daily newspaper and is one of the oldest dailies in Iran. According to PBS it has an estimated circulation of 90.000 and is one of the best distributed newspapers in the country. Also it has an international English language version based in London and New York (Website PBS). Its chief editor is Mahmoud Doai (یياعد دومحم) and the newspaper is published by Iran Chap Organization (پاچناريا تکرش ). The third Iranian newspaper is Shargh (قرش), which is one of the few popular reformist newspapers in Iran. Due to several disbands of this newspaper, it is very difficult to come to an estimated circulation, but there are estimations between 130.000 and 360.000. The content of Shargh newspaper is from a liberal perspective and the newspaper is famous of being critical to conservatives and specifically the intelligent services, the Revolutionary Guards and Keyhan newspaper. This privately owned newspaper’s chief editor is Mehdi Rahmanian (ناينامحر یدهم) and its headquarter is based in Tehran. The three Iranian newspapers used in this research are published in Farsi.

3.3. Method and period of selection

As mentioned in the previous part, there are six newspapers included in this research that are published in 2015. For every month of 2015, ten articles per newspaper with the subject Iran (for Saudi Arabian newspapers) and Saudi Arabia (for Iranian newspapers) are (randomly) selected. Obviously, in each newspaper more than ten articles per month were published and due to limited available time, inclusion of all articles with the relevant subjects would make this research impossible. Each newspaper has an official website and each website is provided with a search engine and by using the words Iran and Saudi Arabia one could find the relevant articles for a specific time period. The articles for this research are all from the domestic (In Arabic and Farsi) printed publication that where available online. Therefor, 120 articles from each newspaper and a total number of 720 articles are included in this research.

For the period of the research, one could ask the question why only 2015 and not a longer period, for example since the beginning of popular revolts or even before? First, there are too many articles to research, even with certain selection types that can shorten the total number (for instance, three periods of two consecutive months in a year with an interval of three

(25)

[25]

month in between). Though this method would broaden the research, it would make it less ‘accurate’; that is, less articles of a year would be included. Although, methodologically, this approach is not wrong, but when it comes to the negative factors of quantitative research, it enforces the superficiality of this research and weakens the ‘deeper’ meaning of representation of the articles’ content. Besides, the events in 2015 make this year much more interesting when it comes to Saudi-Iranian relations. Also, the purpose of a longer period of research, in this case, is to capture and show a change in time, but as the change in Saudi-Iranian relations is obvious, I found it not necessary and less relevant to research. The goal of this research is not to show whether a change has occurred, but rather how these newspapers represent the other and the influence of the context – what has happened in 2015 and which events have occurred – on the image of the ‘other’.

3.4. Codebook and analyzing

The next phase of the research is how to analyze the articles. To analyze the variables I have used the IBM SPSS Statistics Data Editor and the graphics and tables are all edited with this computer program. Also, based on theoretical framework, a book of codes containing 67 variables has been formed. Each variable has a variety of numbers of indicators to represent the variable. The selection of these indicators is based on previous studies, history of the relation, characteristics of the countries and theoretical framework of this research (see figure 2.2).

Frist variable is the article number. Each article has been granted a specific number based on the order of analyzing during the research. Next variables are the date, length, form, title, newspaper and the country. The form of the article shows whether the subject is, for example, discussed, analyzed and debated, or is it just news coverage. Also, it is important to notice whether a title contains concepts related to the specific country; is the word ‘Iran’ or an equivalent included in the title of Saudi articles and vice versa? Likewise, in which section is the article published? These are all indicators that may explain the importance of the subject based on the attention that a subject gets. The mentioned variables are part of ‘visibility’ that is extracted from the materiality part of imaging theory. To make a subject known to the public, it is important to make it visible by, for instance, choosing a certain title, including a corresponding name and also a picture that can grasp the reader’s attention along with the position of the article in the newspaper; obviously, an article in the front page gets more attention than articles in other pages. The next variables are author and source. These

(26)

[26]

variables are representing the ‘Gatekeeper’ concept of imaging theory, that is, which subject in what form and from what source has been given attention?

The subject of the articles is the next variable. Some of the indicators are: Yemeni conflict, Syrian civil war, Wahhabism, Bahraini revolution, Iran nuclear deal, Oil, terrorism, Arab-Persian clash, etc. These indicators were included before the research, but there are indicators that have been added during the research due to repetition of occurrence in the articles. Next variables are connected to SRT theory and imagology. These variables represent the representation of the two countries: subject country (Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Lebanon), image Iran, image Saudi Arabia, Iran-West relations, Saudi-West relations, Iran & terrorism, Saudi Arabia & terrorism, Iran-Israel relations, Saudi-Israel relations, gap between Iranian government and Iranians, gap between Saudi government and Saudis, Shiism, Sunnism, Wahhabism, modernity, image women, image Iran & Saudi Arabia in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Bahrain and Iraq, image Iran nuclear deal and criticizing Iran & Saudi Arabia. These variables are all linked to Iran and Saudi Arabia, that is, the subject of the article is not, for example, Wahhabism, but Wahhabism with respect to Iran or Saudi Arabia. The same approach applies, for instance, to women’s image; the subject of the article is women’s image linked to Iran or Saudi Arabia. The complete list of variables and their respective indicators are presented in the book of codes at the end of this paper.

Though the theoretical framework and methodology are the key parts of the operationalization process of this research, the variables that are used will not be justified without a historical background, in which some concepts that are important to understand the selected variables will be introduced. In the next chapter this historical background of Saudi-Iranian relation will be presented and the concepts that are important to explain, particularly, the religious, racial, and country-bound stereotypes, will be presented at the end of the next chapter.

(27)

[27]

4. Saudi-Iranian relations

In this chapter I will present an overview of the history of Saudi-Iranian relations before and after the Iranian revolution followed by an analysis of the reasons why this relation states in such a shaky condition.

4.1. Before Iranian Revolution of 1979

Shortly after the establishment of the Saudi monarchy in 1928, the Saudis formed formal relations with the Iranians; however, visits between heads of states did not take place until mid-1960s. This was in reaction to diplomatic dialogue which in turn was a reaction to overthrow of King Faysal in Iraq (Jahner, 2012: 39). Faysal’s ousting by nationalist forces concerned the monarchies of the region about the possibility of additional populist revolts. Consequently, Muhammad Reza Shah and King Saud initiated frequent coordinative political consultations to reinforce the relationship between the two ruling families and their countries (Fürtig, 2007:628). Obviously, this relationship was a result of shared interest of consolidation of the monarchies, and, additionally, common economic objectives. Struggle against nationalist radical movements in the Gulf region, fighting socialist influences, securing a stable flow of gas and oil and increasing wealth were all factors that navigated this close relation and united Iran and Saudi Arabia till the end of 1970s (Fürtig, 2007:629). Additionally, this period of friendly relation may also be a result of similarities in the form and structure of the government, strengthened with complementary domestic goals and aligned foreign policy. As already mentioned, sectarian and racial differences were not emphasized during this period. Before the Iranian revolution, political confrontations in the Gulf region were based on dichotomy of conservative-radical rather than Sunni-Shiite or Arab-Persian (Jahner, 2012:39). This claim is in contrast with the common analyses of the region’s conflicts which are particularly, though I believe, wrongly, labelled as sectarian conflicts. Certainly, sectarianism partly influences the tensions, but, I believe, it is not the cause of alteration of this complicated relation.

The pre-1979 relation reveals that linguistic, cultural and religious differences were easily overcome by focusing on shared domestic and international concerns that aligned these two, later on, rival countries in their political discourses (Jahner, 2012:39). Still, despite the prior

(28)

[28]

successes of Saudi-Iranian relation, diplomatic cooperation did not continue after the dethronement of Shah in 1979. The revolution resulted into drastic changes in Iranian foreign policy which was, and still is, regarded by Saudi monarchy as a threat to the status-quo of the kingdom, the Gulf and the region as a whole.

4.2. From 1979 till the end of Iran-Iraq war

The fall of the Shah in 1979 deteriorated the Saudi-Iranian relation. The revolution represented the core reason – fighting popular mobilization – why the Shah and al-Saud had been united. This process of deterioration of Saudi-Iranian relation proceeded till the complete diplomatic break in 1988 (Okruhlik, 2003:116). Saudis viewed the revolutionary Iran as a destabilizing factor in the region. They often use the argument that Iran ‘repeatedly attempts to export its revolution to other Golf states’ (Kechichian, 1999:234). Also, post-revolution Iran considered Saudi Arabia as unfit to be the ‘Custodian of the Holy Shrines’ – Mecca & Medina – while Khomeini’s ideology was also antimonarchical, populist and based on clerical authority, which were all factors opposite to Saudi domestic political discourse (Wehrey et al, 2009:3). In addition to opposite ideologies and policies, the main impact of the post-revolution period on the Saudi-Iranian relation was the profound mistrust between the two countries that ultimately lead to break of the diplomatic relations and opened up a great rivalry for power and influence in the region (Jahner, 2012:40).

In the following Iran-Iraq war shortly after the revolution, Saudi Arabia, economically and politically, supported Iraq, a move that further deteriorated the Saudi-Iranian relation. Saudis decided to loan forty milliard US dollars to reinforce the Iraqi army in the war against Iran. This decision was based on the fear of the Saudis of the revolutionary Iran and its ‘propaganda against the Kingdom’ (Amiri et al, 2011:680). In one of he’s interviews in Al Mayadeen TV (نيدايملا) with the director of the channel and former reporter of Al Jazeera TV Ghassan bin Jiddo (ودج نب ناسغ), the secretary general of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, mentioned that the formal Saudi minister of foreign affairs Saud Al Faisal (لصيفلا دوعس) told the former Iranian foreign minister Ali Akbar Velayati (یتيلاو ربکا یلع) in a closed multilateral meeting in which the Hezbollah leader participated:

(29)

[29]

“[…] yes, we did help Saddam to attack Iran and we gave him forty milliard [dollars] and if we had more we would have given more to get rid of your evil” (Al Mayadeen TV, 21 March 2016)

Fürtig claims that Saudi decision represents an important shift in triangular order of the Golf whereby the power order of the region shifted from Saudi Arabia and Iran containing Iraq to Saudi-Iraqi alliance to contain Iran (2007:627). Additionally, in 1981 the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) (يجيلخلا نواعتلا سلجم) was established with its subsequent anti-Iran political agenda. In 1982 the secretary general of GCC Abdullah Bashara (ةراشب الله دبع) announced that Iran’s aim for supremacy in the Gulf was the primary threat to the stability of the Gulf region (Okruhlik, 2003:116). As the Iran-Iraq war progressed, Saudis proceeded to raise the pressure on Iran by using economic means to damage Iranian economy that was already under the American and European sanctions. According to Okruhlik, after the Iranian attack on Fao port in Iraq which lead to an increase in oil prices, Saudis flooded the international market with oil, causing oil prices to collapse (2003:116). This policy damaged the Iranian economy further because of decrease in oil revenues during the high military expenditures of war. Even now, this tactic of using international oil markets to damage Iran’s economy continues to be propagated by Saudi regime.

Saudi-Iranian relation reached the lowest point during and after 1987 Mecca incident. Iranian Haj pilgrims demonstrated against the Saudi regime in Mecca, which led to violent reaction of Saudi security forces whereby 275 Iranians were killed and 303 were wounded (Amiri et al, 2011:680). Saudi regime blamed Iran for the incident, stating that Iran ‘violated the spiritual significance of Haj to exploit the pilgrimage for political gain’ (Amiri et al, 2011:681). While the incident could account for one of the worst in the history, it, simultaneously, outraged the Islamic Republic and reinforced the Saudi fears that Iran aims to overthrow the regime in Saudi Arabia (Amiri et al, 2011:680). As a consequence, in 1988, diplomatic relation was broken off and Iran boycotted the Haj in the years after (Jahner, 2012:41).

4.3. Rapprochement of 1990s

The diplomatic break in Saudi-Iranian relation continued after the end of Iran-Iraq war in 1989. However, the invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi forces in 1990 changed the previous triangular relation. This aggression made Saudi Arabia to come to view Iraq as a greater threat

(30)

[30]

to its safety than Iran, and as Iran remained strongly anti-Iraq, both countries saw the possibility to closing the diplomatic gap between them. The first Gulf war cooled the hostilities between Iran and Saudi Arabia due to the new threat of the common enemy, while diplomatic relation did not restore till March, 1991(Fürtig, 2007:630).

Also, the two countries started to converge on economic issues, as Iran began to see the importance of cooperation with Saudis in international oil market (Amiri et al, 2010:51). Newly elected president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (یناجنسفر یمشاه ربکا یلع) aimed to normalize the relations with Gulf countries to restore the socio-economic devastation resulting from eight-year war with Iraq (Okruhlik, 2003:113).

Also, Saudis took economic considerations into account as it turned out, prior to the Iranian boycott of Haj, Iranians accounted for the largest number of Haj pilgrimage. Toward the end of 1990s even the GCC began to recognize that previous conceptions of ‘Iranian threat’ may have been exaggerated. In 1997 the GCC acknowledged that the Iranian government wanted to open a new page in its relation with the Gulf States (Kechichian, 1999:237). Generally, the 1990s was characterized by rapprochement policies from both sides and geopolitical and economic considerations allowed them to overcome the past.

4.4. US invasion of Iraq

After the 9/11 attacks, US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and removing Saddam from power, the power relation in the region shifted again, negatively influencing Saudi-Iranian relation. The US war destroyed the balance of power and enflamed extremist tendencies, raising the sectarian grievances and, once again, tensioned the East-West relations (Jahner, 2012:43). But the most significant impact was destroying the ‘triangular’ relations and replacing it with a ‘bipolar’ structure putting Iran and Saudi Arabia directly against each other (Chubin, 2009:168). While Iranian influence in Iraq increased, the Saudi fears of early post-revolution period resurfaced. From Saudi perspective, the Iraqi demographic composition with the Shiites majority of sixty-five percent, permits Iran to continue with the ‘export of the revolution’ (Fürtig, 2007:635). According to Fürtig, by removing Saddam, the US did Iran a great favor and at the same time damaged its own credibility in the region by its failure to stabilize the post-war Iraq (2007:634). While the influence of Iran in consecutive Shiite majority governments increased, also the Saudi involvement in Iraq increased. In 2007, Dahr

(31)

[31]

Jamail posted an article on Foreign Policy in Focus wherein he emphasized the role of Saudi Arabia in destabilization of Iraq. According to an official report in Los Angeles Times on 15 July 2007, about forty-five percent of all foreign insurgents who were targeting Iraqi civilians and security forces with suicide bombs were Saudi Arabian (Website Foreign Policy in Focus). The Saudi spokesman for Interior Ministry Gen. Mansour Turki blamed the Iraqi government for allowing Saudis to enter Iraq. In the same year, Sami Askari, a spokesman of formal Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maleki claimed that:

“The fact is that Saudi Arabia has strong intelligence resources, and it would be hard to think that they are not aware of what is going on” (FPIF website)

Askari also claimed that clerics in Saudi mosques regularly call for jihad against Shiites in Iraq. This kind of rhetoric was characteristic to the Saudi-Iraqi as well as Saudi-Iranian relations, as Iran, also, stepped up the accusation against Saudi Arabia, resulting into deterioration of Saudi-Iranian relations. This political context continued till this relation was even more challenged with the start of popular revolts in 2010.

4.5. Arab popular uprising

This time, in contrast to regime changes in Iraq and Afghanistan, the long-established dictators were challenged domestically. In Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Yemen and even Morocco and Jordan, people demanded socio-economic and political reforms. These mass protests, in some cases revolutions, represented a great threat to the rule of Al-Saud who feared the outbreak of similar protests in the Kingdom (Jahner, 2012:45). To prevent any mass protest in Saudi Arabia, the regime used two complementary strategies: One is the common strategy of domestic repression combined with economic incentives; the second is creating regional alliances and helping faltering states (Kamrava, 2012:97).

To achieve both objectives, Saudis created, or reinforced, the existence of an outside threat: Persian-Shiite Iran. As mentioned before, the sectarian argument may partially be used by regimes as a tool to boost a certain political discourse. According to Madawi Al-Rasheed, the Saudi regime combines repression with, occasionally, co-optation and even promotion of minority rights (Al-Rasheed, 2011:514). Additionally, the regime may repress the Shiites in order to address relevant issues of majority Sunnis to respond to their grievances, for example

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

The workshop (Leiden/Amsterdam, 20- 22 February 2004) will bring together scholars and practitioners from Eu- rope, the US and the Middle East—in- cluding Saudi

Creating a valuable network is essential to firm performance, and therefore it is essential for entrepreneurs to create new connections, to maintain existing

By following the offensive realist and security dilemma theory of the international relations field, it will be examined if the actions of both States in Yemen are driven

Whereas the non-violent Islamist movement is typically a student movement, only eighteen of the listed members had a higher education and only ten of these had acquired a

This conference led to the adoption of a charter containing a set of “recommendations.” Some of these can be considered as a severe blow to the Wahhabi

With regard to Saudi Arabia itself, they stressed as well the “zero framework for civil society and no independent judiciary,” in the words of Matruk al-Falih, a political

Abstract: The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) protects the personal data of natural persons and at the same time allows the free movement of such data within the

The aim of this chapter is to provide insight into women entrepreneurship, with the focus on the characteristics of the women entrepreneur, driving forces for starting a